셰익스피어 『 줄리어스 시저』 에 나타난 ‘차이’와 ‘반복’의 양상
‘Difference’ & ‘Repetition’ in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Shakespeare describes conflict of power in Julius Caesar which is based on Roman history. Particularly he focuses on the moment when Caesar tries to become the emperor by defeating Pompeius, one of three powers in triumvirate of Rome. The republicans of Rome revolt against his coming dictatorship that they have regarded as the barriers of ‘freedom’ and ‘justice.’ Cassius, a radical republican, induces Brutus to conspire the assassination of Caesar with other aristocrats for protecting democracy of Rome. This conflict of power which exists everywhere of human society can be applied to Foucault’s theory of ‘power’. In this paper, I try to apply the aspects of ‘repetition’ and ‘difference’ to the theory of Deleuze. Caesar shows ‘repetition’ of self-righteousness and stubbornness in proceeding his enthronement of emperor, which comes to be the cause of Brustus and Cassius’ revolt against the dictatorship. However, Brutus and Cassius also imitate Caesar’s repetition after getting power by assassinating Caesar. They cannot prove any ‘difference’ from Caesar which has been suggested as the cause of their revolution. This should be criticized only as the imitation of Caesar’s negative repetition. Thus, by negative effects of their repetition, they show distrust and disharmony between them. In addition, Portia becomes the victim of Brutus’ ideology of ‘Roman’, which excludes women in deciding major issues even in the family. Shakespeare shows very negative aspects of Roman mob in this work. They show periodical changeableness according to the change of power in Rome. However, their inconsistency can be evaluated as the possibility of ‘difference’ which we cannot find in repetition of Caesar and republicans. As a matter of fact, the people as the minority of power have developed into democratic citizens in modern society by overthrowing the dictatorship of kings and aristocrats in human history.
Abstract
Shakespeare describes conflict of power in Julius Caesar which is based on Roman history. Particularly he focuses on the moment when Caesar tries to become the emperor by defeating Pompeius, one of three powers in triumvirate of Rome. The republicans of Rome revolt against his coming dictatorship that they have regarded as the barriers of ‘freedom’ and ‘justice.’ Cassius, a radical republican, induces Brutus to conspire the assassination of Caesar with other aristocrats for protecting democracy of Rome. This conflict of power which exists everywhere of human society can be applied to Foucault’s theory of ‘power’. In this paper, I try to apply the aspects of ‘repetition’ and ‘difference’ to the theory of Deleuze. Caesar shows ‘repetition’ of self-righteousness and stubbornness in proceeding his enthronement of emperor, which comes to be the cause of Brustus and Cassius’ revolt against the dictatorship. However, Brutus and Cassius also imitate Caesar’s repetition after getting power by assassinating Caesar. They cannot prove any ‘difference’ from Caesar which has been suggested as the cause of their revolution. This should be criticized only as the imitation of Caesar’s negative repetition. Thus, by negative effects of their repetition, they show distrust and disharmony between them. In addition, Portia becomes the victim of Brutus’ ideology of ‘Roman’, which excludes women in deciding major issues even in the family. Shakespeare shows very negative aspects of Roman mob in this work. They show periodical changeableness according to the change of power in Rome. However, their inconsistency can be evaluated as the possibility of ‘difference’ which we cannot find in repetition of Caesar and republicans. As a matter of fact, the people as the minority of power have developed into democratic citizens in modern society by overthrowing the dictatorship of kings and aristocrats in human history.
참고문헌 (38)
- 김부용, "권력의 행사방식 논의에 대한 푸코의 비판과 보완", 철학사상, (38), pp.239~267 (2010), 철학사상연구소
- 연효숙, "창조적 맑스주의자, 들뢰즈", 진보평론, (30), pp.354~360 (2006)
- 이용은, "「줄리어스 시저」에 나타난 ‘위기의 사회’", 고전 르네상스 영문학, 20(2), pp.165~188 (2011), 한국 고전 르네상스 영문학회
- 이행수, "『줄리어스 시저』: 힘에의 의지", Shakespeare Review, 43(2), pp.329~348 (2007), 한국셰익스피어학회
- 질 들뢰즈, "차이와 반복" (2005), 민음사
- 박동권, "『줄리어스 시저』에 나타난 설득 기술", 영어영문학연구, 53(1), pp.179~197 (2011), 한국중앙영어영문학회
- 박정태, "일자의 철학자 들뢰즈?: 들뢰즈에게 있어서의 이타성, 동일성 그리고 일자의 문제제기", 철학과 현실, 81, pp.123~135 (2009)
- 박효춘, "『줄리어스 시저』의 이상주의와 현실주의 정치 대립을 통해 본 평민들의 꿈", Shakespeare Review, 47(2), pp.273~312 (2011), 한국셰익스피어학회
- 한용재, "「줄리어스 시저」에 나타난 정신에 대해서", Shakespeare Review, 48(3), pp.639~659 (2012), 한국셰익스피어학회
- Archer, John, "Citizen Shakespeare" (2005), Palgrave Macmillan
- Belsey, Catherine, "The Subject of Tragedy" (1985), Methuen
- Danson, Lawrence, "Modern Critical Interpretations. No. 8: William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar" (1988), Chelsea House
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Les Etudes Bergsoniennnes, volume 4" (1956), Albin Michel
- 이충민, "프루스트와 기호들" (1997), 민음사
- Dorsh, T. S., "Julius Caesar: The Arden Shakespeare", pp.47~74 (1988), Routledge
- Evans, Gareth Lloyd, "The Upstart Crow" (1979), Clarendon P.
- Foucault, "La Volonte du Savoir: Histoire de la Sexualite Tombe I", ~ (1976)
- Knowlege. selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, "Power", pp.1980, Foucault
- Foucault, "Surveiller et Punir: Naissance de la Prison" (1975), Edition Gallimard
- Knowlege, selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, "Power", pp.1980, Foucault
- Knowlege: selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, "Power", pp.1980, Foucault
- Knowlege.selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, "Power", pp.1980, Foucault
- Greenblatt, Stephen, "Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare" (1980), U of Chicago P
- Greene, Gayle, "“‘The Power of Speech", To Stir Men’s Blood’”: Language Tragedy in Julius Caesar, 1980, pp.11, 67~94
- Gregson, James, "Public & Private Man in Shakespeare" (1983), Croom Helm
- Hadfield, Andrew, "Shakespeare and Republicanism" (2005), Cambridge UP
- Hager, Alan, "Shakespeare’s Political Animal" (1990), Associated UP
- 이경원, "Masculinity and Empire in Shakespeare's Roman Plays", Shakespeare Review, 43(4), pp.809~838 (2007), 한국셰익스피어학회
- Leggatt, Alexander, "Shakespeare’s Political Drama" (1988), Routelege
- Lindenberger, Herbert, "Historical Drama" (1975), Chicago UP
- Mahler, Andreas, "Julius Caesar: New Critical Essays", pp.181~195 (2005), Routledge
- Miola, Robert S, "Shakespeare’s Rome" (1983), Cambridge UP
- Riley, Dick, "Shakespeare’s Consuls. Cardinals, and Kings" (2008), Continuum
- Scragg, Leah, "Discovering Shakespeare’s Meaning" (1994), Longman
- Shakespeare, William, "Julius Caesar" (1982), Methuen
- Stirling, Brents, "Shakespeare The Tragedies", pp.34~43 (1964), Prentice Hall
- Thomas, Vivian, "Julius Caesar" (1992), Harvester Wheatsheaf
- Weber, Max, "Economy and Society: An outline of interpretative sociology" (1978), U of California P